scholarly journals Bleeding risk assessment in atrial fibrillation: observations on the use and misuse of bleeding risk scores

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (9) ◽  
pp. 1711-1714 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Y. H. Lip ◽  
D. A. Lane
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores

Comparison of the CHADS2, CHA2DS2 -VASc and HAS-BLED scores for the prediction of clinically relevant bleeding in anticoagulated patients with atrial fibrillation: The AMADEUS trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 110 (11) ◽  
pp. 1074-1079 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stavros Apostolakis ◽  
Deirdre A. Lane ◽  
Harry Buller ◽  
Gregory Y. H. Lip
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Stroke Risk ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Net Reclassification Improvement ◽  
Anticoagulated Patients ◽  
Discriminatory Performance

SummaryMany of the risk factors for stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF) are also important risk factors for bleeding. We tested the hypothesis that the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores (used for stroke risk assessment) could be used to predict serious bleeding, and that these scores would compare well against the HAS-BLED score, which is a specific risk score designed for bleeding risk assessment. From the AMADEUS trial, we focused on the trial’s primary safety outcome for serious bleeding, which was “any clinically relevant bleeding”. The predictive value of HAS-BLED/CHADS2/CHA2DS2-VASc were compared by area under the curve (AUC, a measure of the c-index) and the Net Reclassification Improvement (NRI). Of 2,293 patients on VKA, 251 (11%) experienced at least one episode of “any clinically relevant bleeding” during an average 429 days follow up period. Incidence of “any clinically relevant bleeding” rose with increasing HAS-BLED/CHADS2/CHA2DS2-VASc scores, but was statistically significant only for HAS-BLED (p<0.0001). Only HAS-BLED demonstrated significant discriminatory performance for “any clinically relevant bleeding” (AUC 0.60, p<0.0001). There were significant AUC-differences between HAS-BLED (which had the highest AUC) and both CHADS2 (p<0.001) and CHA2DS2VASc (p=0.001). The HAS-BLED score also demonstrated significant NRI for the outcome of “any clinically relevant bleeding” when compared with CHADS2 (p=0.001) and CHA2DS2-VASc (p=0.04). In conclusion, the HAS-BLED score demonstrated significant discriminatory performance for “any clinically relevant bleeding” in anticoagulated patients with AF, whilst the CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores did not. Bleeding risk assessment should be made using a specific bleeding risk score such as HAS-BLED, and the stroke risk scores such as CHADS2 or CHA2DS2-VASc scores should not be used.

Risk Stratification Models in Atrial Fibrillation

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (05) ◽  
pp. 505-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farhan Shahid ◽  
Gregory Lip
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Practical Method ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Mortality And Morbidity ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Morbidity Risk ◽  
Aid Decision

AbstractAtrial fibrillation (AF) is associated with an increased risk of stroke compared with the general population. AF-related stroke confers a higher mortality and morbidity risk, and thus, early detection and assessment for the initiation of effective stroke prevention with oral anticoagulation are crucial. Simple and practical risk assessment tools are essential to facilitate stroke and bleeding risk assessment in busy clinics and wards to aid decision making. At present, the CHA2DS2VASc score is recommended by guidelines as the most simple and practical method of assessing stroke risk in AF patients. Alongside this, the use of the HAS-BLED score aims to identify patients at high risk of bleeding for more regular review and follow-up, and draws attention to potentially reversible bleeding risk factors. The aim of this review article is to summarize the current risk scores available for both stroke and bleeding in AF patients, and the recommendations for their use.

scholarly journals Anticoagulation risk assessment for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism: A clinical review

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 141-152
Author(s):  
Vincent A Pallazola ◽  
Rishi K Kapoor ◽  
Karan Kapoor ◽  
John W McEvoy ◽  
Roger S Blumenthal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Assessment Tools

Non-valvular atrial fibrillation and venous thromboembolism anticoagulation risk assessment tools have been increasingly utilized to guide implementation and duration of anticoagulant therapy. Anticoagulation significantly reduces stroke and recurrent venous thromboembolism risk, but comes at the cost of increased risk of major and clinically relevant non-major bleeding. The decision for anticoagulation in high-risk patients is complicated by the fact that many risk factors associated with increased thromboembolic risk are simultaneously associated with increased bleeding risk. Traditional risk assessment tools rely heavily on age, sex, and presence of cardiovascular comorbidities, with newer tools additionally taking into account changes in risk factors over time and novel biomarkers to facilitate more personalized risk assessment. These tools may help counsel and inform patients about the risks and benefits of starting or continuing anticoagulant therapy and can identify patients who may benefit from more careful management. Although the ability to predict anticoagulant-associated hemorrhagic risk is modest, ischemic and bleeding risk scores have been shown to add significant value to therapeutic management decisions. Ultimately, further work is needed to optimally implement accurate and actionable risk stratification into clinical practice.

Abstract 12541: Features and Causes of Death of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Seen in French Hospitals in 2012

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent Fauchier ◽  
Adeline Samson ◽  
Gwendoline Chaize ◽  
Anne-Françoise Gaudin ◽  
Alexandre Vainchtock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Disease States ◽  
Previous Diagnosis ◽  
Cause Of Deaths ◽  
Cv Disease ◽  
Causes Of Deaths

Introduction/Hypothesis: Atrial fibrillation (AF) has been associated with worse clinical outcomes in many cardiovascular (CV) disease states. There is a lack of data on real world specific causes of deaths in AF patients. The objective of this study was to provide features and causes of deaths of patients with AF seen in French hospitals. Methods: This French cohort study was based on the national hospitalization database (PMSI) covering hospital care for the entire population. All discharged dead patients in 2012 with a previous diagnosis of AF were identified. Cause of death was defined as the principal diagnosis of the last hospitalization stay. Thromboembolic risk scores (HAS-BLED, HEMORR2HAGES and ATRIA) and bleeding risk scores (CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc) calculations were based on a 5-year look-back period of medical history. Results: In 2012, 533,044 AF patients were identified through the PMSI; among them 50,165 (9.4%) died in French hospitals. Deceased patients were older than patients discharged alive (82.3±9.3 vs. 78.0±11.4; p<0.001). They more often suffered from hypertension (73% vs. 70%), diabetes (27% vs. 24%), renal failure (39% vs. 23%), cancer (30% vs. 19%) and, liver failure (9% vs. 5%) (p<0.001 in all cases). Mean stroke and bleeding risk scores were significantly higher for dead patients: CHADS2 was 2.7±1.3 vs. 2.3±1.3 (p<0.001), CHA2DS2-VASc was 4.6±1.6 vs. 4.0±1.8 (p<0.001), HAS-BLED was 2.6±1.1 vs. 2.2±1.1 (p<0.001), HEMORR2HAGES was 3.0±1.4 vs. 2.3±1.5 (p<0.001) and ATRIA was 4.4±2.4 vs. 3.3±2.4 (p<0.001). Cardiovascular (CV)-related deaths represented 34% of all deaths, including heart failures (15.0%), strokes (8.5%), hemorrhages (1.4%) and, TIA/Systemic embolism (1.3%) (cf. Table1). Conclusions: In this systematic analysis of a real-life contemporary AF population, about 10% of deaths were related to stroke/TIA/SE. Despite CV events were a major cause of deaths; a greater part of deaths was related to non-CV causes.

Abstract 18538: The ATRIA Stroke Risk Score Predicts Ischemic Stroke Better than CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc in a large Swedish Cohort of Patients with Atrial Fibrillation

Circulation ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 130 (suppl_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Aspberg ◽  
Yuchiao Chang ◽  
Daniel Singer
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Risk Score ◽  
Stroke Risk ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Cut Points ◽  
Net Clinical Benefit ◽  
Better Than

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major risk factor for acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Anticoagulation therapy (OAC) effectively prevents AIS, but increases bleeding risk. There is a need for better AIS risk prediction to optimize the anticoagulation decision in AF. The ATRIA stroke risk score (ATRIA) (table) was superior to CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc in two large California community AF cohorts. We now report the performance of the 3 scores in a very large Swedish AF cohort. Methods: The cohort consisted of all Swedish patients hospitalized with a diagnosis of AF from July 1, 2005 to December 31, 2008. Predictor variables and the outcome, AIS, were obtained from inpatient ICD-10 codes. Warfarin use was determined from National Pharmacy Database. Risk scores were assessed via c-index (C) and net reclassification index (NRI). Results: The cohort included 158,370 AF patients off warfarin who contributed 340,332 person-years of follow-up, and 11,823 incident AIS, for an overall AIS rate of 3.47%/yr, higher than the 2%/yr seen in the California cohorts. Using the entire point score, ATRIA had a good C of 0.712 (0.708-0.716), significantly better than CHADS2, 0.694 (0.689-0.698), or CHA2DS2-VASc, 0.697 (0.693-0.702). Using published cut-points for Low/Moderate/High AIS risk, C deteriorated for all scores but ATRIA and CHADS2 were superior to CHA2DS2-VASc. NRI favored ATRIA; 0.16 (0.15-0.18) versus CHADS2; 0.22 (0.21-0.24) versus CHA2DS2-VASc. However, NRI decreased to near-zero when cut-points were altered to better fit the cohort’s stroke rates. Conclusion: Findings in this large Swedish AF cohort validate those in the California AF cohorts, with the ATRIA score predicting stroke risk better than CHADS2 or CHA2DS2-VASc. However, relative performance of the categorical scores varied by population stroke risk. Knowledge about this population risk may be needed to optimize cut-points on the multipoint scores to achieve better net clinical benefit from OAC.

scholarly journals GARFIELD-AF model for prediction of stroke and major bleeding in atrial fibrillation: a Danish nationwide validation study

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (11) ◽  
pp. e033283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederik Dalgaard ◽  
Karen Pieper ◽  
Freek Verheugt ◽  
A John Camm ◽  
Keith AA Fox ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Ischaemic Stroke ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Risk Model ◽  
Oral Anticoagulants ◽  
External Validation ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Secondary Outcome

ObjectivesTo externally validate the accuracy of the Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) model against existing risk scores for stroke and major bleeding risk in patients with non-valvular AF in a population-based cohort.DesignRetrospective cohort study.SettingDanish nationwide registries.Participants90 693 patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular AF were included between 2010 and 2016, with follow-up censored at 1 year.Primary and secondary outcome measuresExternal validation was performed using discrimination and calibration plots. C-statistics were compared with CHA2DS2VASc score for ischaemic stroke/systemic embolism (SE) and HAS-BLED score for major bleeding/haemorrhagic stroke outcomes.ResultsOf the 90 693 included, 51 180 patients received oral anticoagulants (OAC). Overall median age (Q1, Q3) were 75 (66–83) years and 48 486 (53.5%) were male. At 1-year follow-up, a total of 2094 (2.3%) strokes/SE, 2642 (2.9%) major bleedings and 10 915 (12.0%) deaths occurred. The GARFIELD-AF model was well calibrated with the predicted risk for stroke/SE and major bleeding. The discriminatory value of GARFIELD-AF risk model was superior to CHA2DS2VASc for predicting stroke in the overall cohort (C-index: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.72 vs C-index: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.66 to 0.68, p<0.001) as well as in low-risk patients (C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.59 to 0.69 vs C-index: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.61, p=0.007). The GARFIELD-AF model was comparable to HAS-BLED in predicting the risk of major bleeding in patients on OAC therapy (C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.66 vs C-index: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.63 to 0.65, p=0.60).ConclusionIn a nationwide Danish cohort with non-valvular AF, the GARFIELD-AF model adequately predicted the risk of ischaemic stroke/SE and major bleeding. Our external validation confirms that the GARFIELD-AF model was superior to CHA2DS2VASc in predicting stroke/SE and comparable with HAS-BLED for predicting major bleeding.

scholarly journals P2296Association of left atrial size with ischemic and bleeding risk scores in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation

2018 ◽  
Vol 39 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Enriquez-Rodriguez ◽  
L Borrego-Bernabe ◽  
A C Espejo Paeres ◽  
A C Rueda-Linarez ◽  
M Jimenez-Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Left Atrial ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Left Atrial Size ◽  
Atrial Size

scholarly journals An mHealth intervention to improve nurses’ atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation knowledge and practice: the EVICOAG study

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caleb Ferguson ◽  
Louise D Hickman ◽  
Jane Phillips ◽  
Phillip J Newton ◽  
Sally C Inglis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Anticoagulation Therapy ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Post Intervention ◽  
Mhealth Intervention ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Nurses Knowledge

Background: There is a need to improve cardiovascular nurses’ knowledge and practices related to stroke prevention, atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation therapy. Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of EVICOAG – a novel mHealth, smartphone-based, spaced-learning intervention on nurses’ knowledge of atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation. Methods: Nurses employed in four clinical specialties (neuroscience, stroke, rehabilitation, cardiology) across three hospitals were invited to participate. In this quasi-experimental study, 12 case-based atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation learning scenarios (hosted by an mHealth platform) were delivered to participants’ smartphones over a 6-week period (July–December 2016) using a spaced timing algorithm. Electronic surveys to assess awareness and knowledge were administered pre (T1) and post (T2) intervention. Results: From 74 participants recruited to T1, 40 completed T2. There was a 54% mean improvement in knowledge levels post-intervention. The largest improvement was achieved in domains related to medication interaction and stroke and bleeding risk assessment. Post-intervention, those who completed T2 were significantly more likely to use CHA2DS2-VASc (2.5% vs. 37.5%) and HAS-BLED (2.5% vs. 35%) tools to assess stroke and bleeding risk, respectively ( P<0.01). Conclusion: The EVICOAG intervention improved nurses’ knowledge of atrial fibrillation and anticoagulation, and influenced their uptake and use of stroke and bleeding risk assessment tools in clinical practice. Future research should focus on whether a similar intervention might improve patient-centred outcomes such as patients’ knowledge of their condition and therapies, medication adherence, time in the therapeutic range and quality of life.

P4742Evaluation of the HAS-BLED, ATRIA and ORBIT bleeding risk scores in newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Bergamaschi ◽  
A Stefanizzi ◽  
M Coriano ◽  
P Paolisso ◽  
I Magnani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Atrial Fibrillation ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Risk Scores ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Hemorrhagic Events ◽  
Major Bleeding Events

Abstract Background Several risk scores have been proposed to assess the bleeding risk in patients with Atrial Fibrillation. Purpose To compare the efficacy of HAS-BLED, ATRIA and ORBIT scores to predict major bleedings in newly diagnosed non-valvular AF (NV-AF) treated with vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) or new oral anticoagulants (NOACs). Methods We analyzed all consecutive patients with AF at our outpatient clinic from January to December 2017. Only those with new diagnosed NV-AF starting new anticoagulant therapy were enrolled. Major hemorrhagic events were defined according to the ISTH definition in non-surgical patients. Results Out of the 820 patients admitted with AF, 305 were newly diagnosed with NV-AF starting oral anticoagulation. Overall, 51.3% were male with a mean age of 72.6±13.7 years. Thirty-six patients (11.8%) started VKAs whereas 269 (88.2%) patients were treated with NOACs. The median follow-up time was 10.4±3.4 months. During follow-up, 123 (32.2%) bleeding events were recorded, 21 (17,1%) in the VKA group and 102 (82,9%) in the NOAC group. Eleven (2.9%) major bleeding events occurred: 5 (45.5%) in the VKA group and 6 (54.5%) in the NOAC group. Overall, patients with major hemorrhagic events showed a mean value of the scores significantly higher when compared to patients without such bleeding complications (HASBLED 3.4 vs 2.4 p=0.007; ATRIA 5.6 vs 2.4 p<0.001; ORBIT 3.6 vs 1.8 p<0,001). Conversely, when analyzing the VKA subgroup, only the ATRIA score was significantly higher in patients with major adverse events (7.4 vs 3.5 p<0.001; HAS-BLED: 4.4 vs 3.6 p=0.27; ORBIT 4.4 vs 2.9 p=0.13). An ATRIA score ≥4 identified patients at high risk of bleeding (29.4% vs. 0% events. respectively, p=0.04). In the NOAC group, patients with major bleeding events had higher mean values of ATRIA (4.0 vs 2.3 p=0.02) and ORBIT (2.8 vs 1.6 p=0,04) but not the HAS-BLED (2.5 vs 2.3 p=0.57) scores. Similarly, patients on NOACs with an ATRIA score ≥4 had higher rates of major bleedings (8.1% vs. 1.6% p=0,02). Comparing the single elements of the ATRIA score, only glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min/1.73 mq was associated with major bleedings in the VKA group (p<0.001) whereas, in the NOAC group, anemia was strongly associated with bleeding events (p=0,02). In fact, multivariate analysis in the NOAC group showed that hemoglobin level at admission was an independent predictor for major bleeding events (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23–0.75, P=0.003). Conversely, in the VKA group, baseline creatinine level was an independent predictor for these events (OR 12.76, 95% CI 1.6–101.7, P=0.016). Conclusions The ATRIA score showed the best efficacy in predicting major bleeding events. Hemoglobin and creatinine levels at admission were independent predictors for major hemorrhagic events in the NOAC and in the VKA groups, respectively. The latter finding might be helpful in stratifying the hemorrhagic risk at the beginning of treatment.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document